Seminars in Arthroplasty
Volume 21, Issue 1 , Pages 36-38 , March 2010

The Optimal Metal-Metal Arthroplasty Is Not a Surface Replacement—Opposes

  • Thomas P. Vail, MD

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Thomas P. Vail, MD, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, 500 Parnassus Avenue, MU320W, San Francisco, CA 94143

References 

  1. Antoniou J, Zukor DJ, Mwale F, et al. Metal ion levels in the blood of patients after hip resurfacing: A comparison between twenty-eight and thirty-six-millimeter-head metal-on-metal prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(suppl 3):142–148
  2. Witzleb WC, Hanisch U, Ziegler J, et al. In vivo wear rate of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: A review of 10 retrieved components. J Arthroplasty. 2008;24:951–956
  3. Isaac GH, Siebel T, Schmalzried TP, et al. Development rationale for an articular surface replacement: A science based evolution. Proc Inst Mech Eng. 2006;220:253–268
  4. Fisher J, Jin Z, Tipper J, et al. Tribology of alternative bearings. Clin Orthop. 2006;453:25–34
  5. Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff M, et al. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop. 2004;418:87–93
  6. Sibanda N, Copley LP, Lewsey JD, et al. steering committee of the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England and Wales Revision rates after primary hip and knee replacement in England between 2003 and 2006. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e179
  7. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry: Annual Report 2008. Adelaide, Australia: AOA; 2008;http://www.aoa.org.auAccessed October 10, 2009
  8. Bozic KJ, Kurtz S, Lau E, et al: The epidemiology of total hip arthroplasty bearing surface usage in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am (in press)
  9. Vail TP, Mina CA, Yergler JD, et al. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup. Clin Orthop. 2006;453:123–131
  10. National Center for Health Statistics: Health, United States 2008. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/dataAccessed October 10, 2009
  11. Lavigne M, Venditolli PA, Roy A. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing metal on metal total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing in patients less than 65 years old. Osteologie. 2005;14(suppl II):80–83
  12. Vail TP, Glisson RR, Dominguez DE, et al. Position of hip resurfacing component affects strain and resistance to fracture in the femoral neck. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1951–1960
  13. Loughead JM, Chesney D, Holland JP, et al. Comparison of offset in Birmingham hip resurfacing and hybrid total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:163–166
  14. Girard J, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA, et al. Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: A randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:721–726
  15. Pollard TC, Baker RP, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, et al. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip (A five- to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing). J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:592–600
  16. Lavigne M, Therrien M, Nantel J, et al. The functional outcome of hip resurfacing and large head THA is the same. Clin Orthop. 2010;468:326–336
  17. Garbuz DS, Tanzer M, Greidanus NV, et al. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing versus large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 2010;468:318–325
  18. Vail TP, Mont MA, McGrath MS, et al. Hip resurfacing: Patient and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(suppl 5):2–4
  19. Siebel T, Maubach S, Morlock MM. Lessons learned from early clinical experience and results of 300 ASR hip resurfacing implantations. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2006;220:345–353
  20. Della Valle CF, Nunley RM, Raterman J, et al. Initial American experience with hip resurfacing following FDA approval. Clin Orthop. 2009;467:72–78
  21. Morlock MM, Bishop N, Zustin J, et al. Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: Morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(suppl 3):89–95
  22. Shimmin AJ, Back D. Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: A national review of 50 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;87:463–464
  23. Shimmin AJ, Bare J, Back DL. Complications associated with hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:187–193
  24. Marker DR, Seyler TM, Jinnah RH, et al. Femoral neck fractures after metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing: A prospective cohort study. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:66–71
  25. Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, et al. The effects of technique changes on aseptic loosening of the femoral component in hip resurfacing (Results of 600 conserve plus with a 3 to 9 year follow-up). J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:481–489
  26. Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ulrich SD, et al. Effect of changing indications and techniques on total hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop. 2007;465:63–70
  27. Stulberg BN, Trier KK, Naughton M, et al. Results and lessons learned from a United States hip resurfacing investigational device exemption trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:21–26
  28. De Haan R, Campbell PA, Su EP, et al. Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: The influence of malpositioning of the components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1158–1163
  29. Zustin J, Amling M, Krause M, et al. Intraosseous lymphocytic infiltrates after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: A histopathological study on 181 retrieved femoral remnants. Virchows Arch. 2009;454:581–588
  30. Campbell P, Shimmin A, Walter L, et al. Metal sensitivity as a cause of groin pain in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:1080–1085
  31. Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P, et al. Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:847–851
  32. Bozic KJ, Pui CM, Silverstein M, et al: The comparative effectiveness of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty for the treatment of advanced osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop (in press)

 Competing interests: Dr Vail is a consultant for DePuy, a J&J Company and has received royalties.

PII: S1045-4527(10)00005-2

doi: 10.1053/j.sart.2010.01.004

Seminars in Arthroplasty
Volume 21, Issue 1 , Pages 36-38 , March 2010

Article Tools